With respect to “Climate Change”, this website and my contribution to the discussion focuses on the data. I have a standing request/challenge to anyone (scientist or not) to provide an empirical Temperature/CO2 data set that shows CO2 driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale. Scientific proof requires empirical data. The Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) theory does not have that empirical data (because that data does not exist).

Open Letter

Final Recap

So, if you’ve read to this point, I am appreciative whether you agree with my opinions or not. Reading through the entire document shows that you were serious. If you skipped to the end your opinion just doesn’t count. Ultimately you have the right to ignore my opinions, but you can’t ignore the data. And the data just doesn’t back up the premise of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.

Solar activity is dropping and will take global temperatures down over the next decade. The magnitude of the drop is still an open question but it will happen. Ignoring that data is putting our children and grandchildren at great risk. Carbon taxes, cap and trade, etc. will have no significant effect (if any) on the global temperatures. However, the rampant unnecessary spending on uneconomic, taxpayer funded, renewable projects will only exaggerate the problems because fewer funds will be available to actually adapt to climate change (warming or cooling).

Generally, the only proof ever offered by “Global Warming” proponents is based on model studies. Those same model studies that are based on computer simulations that have not been able to predict the climate we’ve experienced over the last 30 years. The same models that can not accurately model the significant climate flucuations the globe has experienced over the Holocene warm period (i.e.: the last 12,000 years). Simply, the models don’t work because they focus primarily on CO2 and hypothesized feedbacks that have never been proven with real world data. They (based on their IPCC mandate) dismiss a wide variety of natural cycles (solar activity (directly and indirectly), ocean cycles, cloud coverage, etc.) that have much more significant effects on the climate than CO2.

Just look back on the data that was presented. CO2 had virtually no direct role in the earth’s temperature fluctuations and now it’s supposed to be responsible for all the warming going forward. Not likely. The natural fluctuations will continue and they will continue to be dominant. And don’t be fooled by media reports and localized current weather events. Climate is a global discussion that needs to be looked at over decades. As laid out, weather related events (hurricanes, tornados, fires, droughts, etc.) are not becoming more extreme despite media reports to the contrary. With the exception of extreme precipitation. During solar minimums (based on historical data) cloud cover overall increases, global temperatures fall and precipitation levels rise (area specific) as a result. A small change in CO2 (i.e.: going from 3 molecules per 10,000, to 4 molecules per 10,000) is not responsible for more rain.